A Fifth Dimension:Neutral point of view
The neutral point of view (NPOV) is the expected point of view from which all articles in A Fifth Dimension should be written, irregardless of belonging to a "real world" or "in-universe" perspective. Like , all A Fifth Dimension articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view. This means "representing fairly, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources."Wikipedia contributors. "Wikipedia:Neutral point of view." Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Version: 2009-05-07. Retrieved: 2009-05-25. This is expected of all editors and all articles in the wiki. One may not agree personally with such perspectives but this is not a message board, this is an encylcopedia with the goal of being precise and thorough. Articles containing a point of view that is documented and verifiable are not open to editor consensus, no matter how unpopular a point of view may be. "We should describe disputes, not engage in them."Wikipedia contributors. "Wikipedia:Neutral point of view." Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Version: 2009-05-07. Retrieved: 2009-05-25. Explanation of neutral point of view Neutral point of view From the Wikipedia article on neutral point of view: The neutral point of view is a means of dealing with conflicting verifiable perspectives on a topic as evidenced by reliable sources. The policy requires that where multiple or conflicting perspectives exist within a topic each should be presented fairly. None of the views should be given undue weight or asserted as being judged as "the truth", in order that the various significant published viewpoints are made accessible to the reader, not just the most popular one. It should also not be asserted that the most popular view, or some sort of intermediate view among the different views, is the correct one to the extent that other views are mentioned only pejoratively. Readers should be allowed to form their own opinions. The neutral point of view is neither sympathetic nor in opposition to its subject: it neither endorses nor discourages viewpoints. As the name suggests, the neutral point of view is a point of view, not the absence or elimination of viewpoints. The elimination of article content cannot be justified under this policy on the grounds that it is "POV". Article content should clearly describe, represent, and characterize disputes within topics, but without endorsement of any particular point of view. Articles should provide background on who believes what and why, and which view is more popular; detailed articles might also contain evaluations of each viewpoint, but must studiously refrain from taking sides. Writing an unbiased article requires a fair analytical representation of all relevant sides of a debate, establishing them with published evidence and describing how they are alike and how they differ. Any editorial bias that leans toward one particular way of viewing the topic should be removed or rewritten in a way that conforms to a NPOV. Bias In A Fifth Dimension, neutrality requires views to be represented clearly and without bias. All sources—even those that are extremely reliable—have specific perspectives from which they view subjects and it isn't important to omit such biases from an article, but it is important to find a way to encorporate these values or opinions into an article with neutrality. Editors also have their own biases, but with an encyclopedia, substantiated facts—defined as "a piece of information about which there is no serious dispute"Wikipedia contributors. "Wikipedia:Neutral point of view." Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Version: 2009-05-07. Retrieved: 2009-05-25.—must supersede any personal values or opinions. Examples of facts: * Earth is a planet. * Rod Serling won awards for The Twilight Zone. * Serling decided to let some of his rights to The Twilight Zone go. * Jack Klugman is an actor. * Murder is a felony in the USA. Examples of values or opinions: * The Earth is a hollow planet. * Rod Serling was the best writer of The Twilight Zone. * Serling was wrong to let some of his rights to The Twilight Zone go. * Jack Klugman never had any good roles. * Killing is wrong. When discussing the facts on which a specific point of view is based, it helps to inform the reader of the details of differing opinions so that the reader is able to estimate the accuracy and credibility of the opposing perspectives. An article should contain enough information for the reader to be able to evaluate the credibility of various sources without the implication that any one view is "more correct" than another. When it is necessary to discuss an opinion, the opinion should be attributed to a source/individual and discuss the fact that the person has this opinion. For instance: Typically a statement like, "Rod Serling was the greatest writer ever," would violate a neutral point of view. However, if you can locate a source such as The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction that makes such a statement, writing "The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction named Rod Serling as the greatest writer ever," would be acceptable. Even though it is still an opinion, that the magazine stated this opinion is a fact. Just make sure to name the source of the statement and include a reference to the publication (e.g., issue number) in which that statement was made to allow for verification by others. In attributing competing views, it is required that the relative levels of support for each of the opposing views be reported and that it does not infer a false impression of parity. The article should represent all significant viewpoints in proportion to the prominence of each. That said, there are some viewpoints that are held by a minority that generally do not need to be discussed in as much detail as those of the majority view. Extremely minor or fringe views may not even need to be mentioned, based on the relevance of those views in fully understanding the subject. Competing views should be presented in proportion to their representation in reliable sources on the subject. Some theories, for example, only appear in literature devoted to themselves, whereas they are minimally mentioned or not mentioned at all in more general sources. Nonetheless, if minor views are felt to be necessary, they should always be mentioned with regard to, and alongside, the majority view. NPOV disputes What is an NPOV dispute? Am article that meets the neutral point of view policy is one that presents all significant views from reliable sources fairly, proportionately, and without bias. While some topics are bound to stir controversy with many differing opinions, the proper way to represent them in an article is to present them as such rather than argue the case for them as facts. The problem arises when people forget that this is an encyclopedia and not an opinion column. Sometimes, even writing an article that one may feel is from a NPOV may not seem to possess the same level of neutrality that a reader may feel represented. This tends to be when an article is flagged with the template and starts a NPOV dispute. Being flagged as such does not necessarily mean that the article truly is biased but that it may give that impression to another user. It is common, however, that if a reader feels their is cause for a point of view debate, the very action probably implies that the article was written in a way—perhaps only vaguely—and it might be helpful to access the arguments and rewrite the article to eliminate disagreements. When writing on conroversial topics, it is especially important to be aware of any potential slant or bias. An exception to this most common cause of an NPOV dispute is basic misunderstanding of the NPOV policy or the subject matter by one party or another. For example, ideologues, when presented with an article that has clear neutrality, will consider the article biased precisely because it does not reflect their own bias enough. Flagging an article as having an NPOV dispute is a temporary action that should be addressed by actual contributions to the article to help establish or improve neutrality to satisfy the dispute's complaints. Avoiding NPOV disputes The following steps should help you to avoid running into problems with NPOV: * Include controversies in the article. Forking an article into two separate articles based on differences of POV is discouraged. Instead, mention both of the opposing views in the main article body, regardless of minority or majority status. * Avoid naming articles with titles that express a bias "for" or "against any opinion. * Name articles with common English language names as found in reliable sources. (see Naming conventions for more advice) * Don't segragate opposing points of view. This can lead to the impression of a hierarchy of fact if opposing opinions are listed outside the main body, possibly giving the impression that the main body is the "true" or "undisputed" account of the subject. A better option is to fold each of the debates into the main passage where a reader can see the differences side-by-side. * Treat each aspect with a weight appropriate to its significance to the subject. Undue weight can be implied by depth of detail, quantity of text, prominence of placement, and juxtaposition of statements. For instance, a long section devoted to a more minority view in an article with a very short majority view section may create the impression that the status is actually the reverse. * Remember that a point of view's proper weight is determined by the viewpoint's prevalence in reliable sources, not its prevalence among AFD editors. * Good use of neutral point of view often comes from research done well, in an unbiased and thorough manner. * Avoid using generalizations. Statements that attribute claims to "some people" or the like are known as mass attribution and are too vague to be used as a source. * Talking with other contributors is possibly the best way to find out why there is a dispute over an article's neutrality. See also * - AFD policy on acceptable points of view. * - Style guidelines. * - Naming guidelines to avoid bias in names. * - Template for flagging NPOV disputed articles. * Category:NPOV disputes - List of disputed articles. Notes and references Notes Category:A Fifth Dimension Policies